Jump to content

ThenNow

Members
  • Content Count

    1545
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

ThenNow last won the day on September 17

ThenNow had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

660 Excellent

1 Follower

About ThenNow

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Unknown
  • Occupation
    Retired
  • Interests
    Culture, Politics, Outdoors & Psychology
  • Biography
    Eagle, Vigil Honor, OA Board Secretary, Exec Board

Recent Profile Visitors

1151 profile views
  1. Please don’t delete my last post. I was submitting nearly simultaneously.
  2. I don’t entirely think so, beloved brother. Those with well-stated open state claims could sail and skate with little involvement. Cases in point, some of our fellow don’t even know who represents them. That’s ghastly and telling. I don’t see that magically changing. Open to be wrong. I’ll just add another hash mark to my poop sheet.
  3. To quote The Fonze, “Exactamundo.” Precisely my point and on the nose for this case. 😠 Bankruptcy is not the forum for mass torts, as the mantra goes.
  4. We had this conversation at some length back when I was less gray-headed and had more stomach lining. I’ll briefly reiterate some of what I said then. My response and opinion to the contingent fee debated divides between the mass aggregators and the long-term (faithful and committed) child sexual abuse attorneys, including Tim Kosnoff. As complex as this case has become, if you have tens of thousand of clients simultaneously, the workload and per client out of pocket is relatively insignificant. Add to that the attorneys have attorneys and I find it even more troubling and egregious. That
  5. On this point, I feel affirmed to be echoed, but hate that it seems few who can or will do anything are listening. I know for a fact that some of you reading this care and are fighting valiantly. We are grateful. The media need to take up this story now. I suppose, in the beginning, middle and end, there is no real leverage point into the turgid muck of the bankruptcy process. The self-interested will not be dissuaded from their march through the village nor persuaded by human misery along the way. “Alas. Earwax...”
  6. Mine has been on the floor for sometime. Better get busy pulling up hardwood and subfloor to squeeze my head between the joists. That way, I have at least ten more feet before the basement concrete.
  7. Yup. Lovely. And, there it is in living color and on the record. Is this the biggest on record? Where does it rank? Talk about getting into the bigs from the jump without so much as an practice swing. Meh, meh, meh. I would characterize this as an admission well after the fact (was obvious). My opinion of course.
  8. [Insert “MegaMeh!” and bottomless disgust.] Blech! Color me disillusioned and disheartened.
  9. “Never get involved in a land war in Asia” and “Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.” I couldn’t resist. Btw, where is the Dread Pirate Roberts when you need him? 🤔
  10. One is an element of the bankruptcy Plan. That’s the Disclosure Statement. The other, discovery, is a general element of litigation, taking various forms, that is one party going on a spelunking expedition to mine data and statements from another party. Let’s call it legal “Go Fish.” Each in turn: The disclosure statement is a document that must contain information concerning the assets, liabilities, and business affairs of the debtor sufficient to enable a creditor to make an informed judgment about the debtor's plan of reorganization. https://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/bankruptcy/b
  11. Not a fair or apt comparison. The TCC is saying this before the court, all parties, BSA, God and the milk man (person). When you're talking about bringing in clients, it is not at ALL what the TCC is doing IN the case BEFORE the world. "Let's use these baselines for in-court valuations" is not equivalent to, "There are billions up for grabs and you can get in on it! Sign here. Oh, wait. I'll do that for you. We'll call you if we need you (to vote.)"
  12. People of integrity, selling whatever it is they're selling, don't do things like that. Every time I deal with a vendor who undersells I make a huge deal out of pointing out what it means to me. Last week I had a guy bidding garage doors and openers. Mine are 21 years old, dated and the openers have put in for Social Security (eligible in garage door opener years.) When I asked him about this really expensive set up, wanting to never do this again, his answer said it all. "Well. I think that's overkill and you don't need it and probably won't ever use it." Sold. One of my friends is part of a
  13. Some have said there's not fraud in this case, other than a limited area identified by that poster. I think that remains to be seen. If true, smells like fraudulent inducement to me. I have zippo words for how I feel as a human, never mind attorney and BSA child sexual abuse survivor, about what is being alleged by the insurers. If true, it's reprehensible.
  14. This rather a cumulative question derived from several posts, so I'm not sure who to quote. We have many hints and no so subtle comments that the Coalition is ready to get out, collect the 40%+ and walk off with whatever that amounts to, likely in the range of $400Mish ish. Not sure how many claimant attorneys make up the Coalition, but that would be fun to know. Anywho, that's not my question. We keep talking about convincing clients to vote and bringing in ballots on behalf of or against a Plan. Many moons ago there was a fight about who gets to put their flyer in the coupon section of all t
×
×
  • Create New...